Wednesday, 17 January 2007

(INDIANAPOLIS) -- The Indiana Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed theexecution of a man scheduled to die Friday in the 1993 murder of an IndianaState trooper, citing a death penalty case that was pending before the U.S.Supreme Court.

In its 3-2 decision, the justices stated that arguments raised by NormanTimberlake's attorneys that he should not be executed because he is mentallyill are similar to those the U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing in the case ofa condemned Texas man.

Attorneys for Scott Louis Panetti, who killed his estranged wife's parentsin 1992 in Fredericksburg, Texas, contend he has suffered from severe mentalillness for 25 years and should be spared the death penalty.

In their order, Indiana justices said the high court's decision in thePanetti case, which might come this summer, could change the standard forexecuting mentally ill patients by offering a new interpretation of theEighth Amendment, which bans cruel and unusual punishment.

"Timberlake'

s situation is sufficiently similar to Panetti's that a stay ofTimberlake's impending execution is appropriate," according to the order,written by Justice Brent Dickson.

The court's decision to stay Timberlake's execution, set to be carried outby chemical injection early Friday at the Indiana State Prison in MichiganCity, came a day after the Indiana Parole Board recommended that Gov. MitchDaniels deny clemency to Timberlake.

Timberlake, 59, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 in the Feb. 5,1993, slaying of Master Trooper Michael E. Greene along Interstate 65 onIndianapolis' northwest side during a routine traffic step.

He has maintained his innocence, blaming Greene's shooting on his travelingcompanion.

Telephone messages seeking comment were left Wednesday by The AssociatedPress for Timberlake's attorneys, Brent Westerfeld and Lorinda Youngcourt.

A message also was left on an answering machine for Master Trooper MichaelE. Greene's son, Michael C. Greene.

A 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found that executing an insane person wouldviolate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Deathpenalty opponents argue, however, that few mentally ill people qualify underthe court's definition because they must be incapable of understanding whythey are being put to death or what they did wrong.

During a Jan. 8 appearance before the state parole board on his clemencyrequest, Timberlake said he has been hearing voices since 1997 from someonewho identifies himself as Satan. He also told the parole board he believeshe is under the control of a machine.

Lorinda Youngcourt, an attorney for Timberlake, has said he has beendiagnosed as suffering from chronic paranoid schizophrenia.

Deputy Attorney General Steve Creason has said testimony shows thatTimberlake both comprehends that he is set to be executed and the reason hefaces a death sentence.

In the Panetti case, the question before the high court is whether theEighth Amendment permits the execution of an inmate "who has a factualawareness of the reason for his execution but who, because of a severemental illness, has a delusional belief as to why the State is executing him... ."

In such a case, Panetti's attorneys contend, a death row inmate "thus doesnot appreciate that his execution is intended to seek retribution for hiscrime."

"If the Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment in a mannersignificantly different ... Timberlake's execution may prove to beprohibited by the Eighth Amendment. We grant a stay to prevent learning theanswer to that question after it is too late," Dickson wrote.

Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and Justice Frank Sullivan Jr., dissentedon the stay order. Shepard wrote in his dissent that the video he watched ofTimberlake's appearance before the parole board "does not suggest that he isinsane. Timberlake rationally understands the reason he is being executed."

Gov. Mitch Daniels in August 2005 commuted the death sentence of ArthurBaird II to life without parole less than 36 hours before he was to beexecuted for killing his parents in 1985.

Baird's lawyers argued he was mentally ill, but the state Parole Board hadvoted 3-1 to recommend that the execution be carried out.

Daniels acknowledged claims that Baird was mentally ill, but he emphasizedother circumstances in his clemency order. They included the fact that lifewithout parole in murder cases was not an option at the time of Baird'ssentencing. It became an option for jurors in 1993, and prosecutors couldseek it on their own in 1994.